Search form

Search this site

The United States Institute of Peace (USIP) was established by Congress in 1984 as an independent, federally-funded national security institution devoted to the nonviolent prevention and mitigation of deadly conflict abroad.

Infighting Marks Lead Up to Iranian Elections

Published:

December 1, 2011

By:

Thomas Omestad

Next year’s parliamentary elections in Iran have intensified infighting among its conservative elites amid moves by the Islamic Republic’s supreme leader to tighten control of the political system, a panel of Iran specialists concluded at the United States Institute of Peace (USIP) on Nov. 18.

Next year’s parliamentary elections in Iran have intensified infighting among its conservative elites amid moves by the Islamic Republic’s supreme leader to tighten control of the political system, a panel of Iran specialists concluded at the United States Institute of Peace (USIP) on Nov. 18.

The March 2012 parliamentary elections will be the first national-scale contest since the disputed presidential election of 2009 and the ensuing mass protests demanding the removal of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad known as the Green Movement. Next year’s legislative elections could see “the supreme leader’s systematic effort to consolidate power,” particularly to “subordinate conservatives” to his will, said Daniel Brumberg, a Middle East politics expert and a senior advisor in USIP’s Center for Conflict Management. But the success of that effort is not a foregone conclusion, as some conservatives may resist a further closing of the Iranian political system to any form of competition.

Iran’s supreme leader is not the elected president but rather a Shiite religious figure, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who has held the post since 1989. Ahmadinejad has worked to undercut the role of the parliament, known as the Majlis, in its legislative, budgetary and oversight roles. Ahmadinejad enjoyed Khamenei’s strong support for many years. But Ahmadinejad’s moves to carve out a more independent and powerful role seem to have run afoul of the supreme leader, and Khamenei supporters in parliament and elsewhere have been emboldened to challenge Ahmadinejad on key issues, such as excluding Ahmadinejad’s allies from what is expected to be the leading conservative bloc in the upcoming elections.

Iran’s internal political struggles are also taking place against a backdrop of economic weakness, driven in part by the growing international pressure and sanctions against Iran for its failure to account for and suspend nuclear fuel production and suspected nuclear weapons activities.

The next presidential election will take place in March 2013, though tensions within the regime have led to speculation that Khamenei has considered eliminating the office of the presidency—a prospect some of the panelists consider unlikely. “The Iranian political system remains very vibrant and very factionalized and very difficult to predict,” said Brumberg.

The significance of the parliamentary contests is seen in the pace of negotiating and horse-trading over which candidates will be part of the leading conservative bloc, said Mehrzad Boroujerdi, an Iran expert and political scientist at Syracuse University. Boroujerdi, who spoke on a Skype connection, said the regime is “trying to bring some order to the chaos of factional fighting.”

Another panelist, Yasmin Alem, agreed that the parliamentary elections are used as an “institutional mechanism” to control factionalism. Iran’s appointed Council of Guardians has increasingly relied on “systematic disqualifications” of reformers and others outside the system by closing legal loopholes for candidacies and making candidate criteria more stringent, and it has manipulated the certification of electoral results, she said. The intent is “to ensure that only those who are really loyal to the supreme leader…are permitted into the parliament,” according to Alem, an independent analyst and author of Duality by Design: The Iranian Electoral System.

Farideh Farhi, an independent political scientist and Iran expert, noted that despite the banning of reformist parties, not all reformers have been purged from parliament or silenced. She said about 30 reformers remain in a parliamentary faction of their own, which can draw on the support of perhaps another 30 deputies.

The fights among conservative players are “about pure power,” she said, and are energized by a “closing of the circle” of those deemed to be reliable supporters of the supreme leader. Said Farhi, “We have entered a period where the most aggressive parts of the Islamic Republic are fighting each other.”

Related Event

Ambassador Dan Feldman, the U.S. Special Representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan, will assess regional security issues and efforts to open peace talks with the Taliban in a presentation on August 5 at the U.S. Institute of Peace. Comments will also be provided by USIP Chairman of the Board of Directors, Stephen J. Hadley, and USIP’s Vice President for South and Central Asia, Dr. Andrew Wilder, and then the discussion will be opened up to the audience.

Yesterday’s announced framework for a deal on Iran’s nuclear program will limit Iran’s nuclear activities in exchange for an end to international economic sanctions against the country. Many experts, including USIP’s Daniel Brumberg, have ...

Iran has agreed with six major powers—the five permanent members of the U.N. Security Council plus Germany—to limit its nuclear activities for at least a decade in exchange for an end to international economic sanctions. This agreement on principles, announced yesterday, is incomplete. More...

While China continues to grow as an economy and a military and political power, its overall influence relative to the United States has passed its peak, former Secretary of State George Shultz said at the U.S. Institute of Peace January 30. As China’s population ages, fewer working-age people...

In the midst of a political shift where power is moving from central institutions to smaller, more distributed units in the international system, the approaches to and methodologies for peacemaking are changing. "Managing Conflict in a World Adrift" provides a sobering panorama of contemporary...

Six years after Barack Obama first visited sub-Saharan Africa as a presidential messenger of democracy, he faces a more complicated task in turning back to the continent next week. Obama hosts Nigeria’s new president, Muhammadu Buhari, on July 20, and then flies to Kenya and Ethiopia. As he does, the continent’s security threats and its urgent need to address ongoing poverty are forcing him to balance priorities and messages, say two former assistant secretaries of state now at the U.S. Institute of Peace.

(cont’d from Part I)
It was December 2014. USIP and its partner organizations in Iraq had recognized a June 2014 massacre at a military base near the northern city of Tikrit as a flashpoint of tension that could accelerate into a cycle of revenge killing. Predominantly Shia tribes from Iraq’s south, where many of the victims were from, had accused Sunni tribes around the base, known as Camp Speicher, of supporting, even joining in the massacre. But careful conflict resolution might prevent a further downward spiral. The intervention team set to work.

In a plain-as-beige conference room at Baghdad’s Babylon Hotel, the anger flared among the 16 robed Iraqi tribal leaders. The men, after all, carried into the room the outrage and fear from one of the country’s deadliest atrocities in recent years – the execution-style slaying in June 2014 of an estimated 1,700 young Iraqi air force cadets and soldiers at a base known as Camp Speicher. The accusations flew across the conference table – that tribes in the area supported the rampage by the self-styled “Islamic State” extremist group, and even joined in the killings. At one point, one of the highest-ranking sheikhs charged up out of his seat to leave the room. It was clear that others would follow.

A Tunisian gunman recently massacred 38 people at the major resort of Sousse. It was the second mass attack this year, after the March 18 assault on the well-known Bardo Museum in the capital Tunis that killed 22 people, most of them tourists. U.S. Institute of Peace Special Advisor Daniel Brumberg explores the ramifications for Tunisia and the region, as the country shows determination to pursue a democratic transition.